The Religious Roots of Alcoholics Anonymous
and the Twelve Steps
by A. Orange

Chapter 4:
The Cult Characteristics of the Oxford Groups

Frank Buchman and his Oxford Groups and MRA displayed many of the characteristics that are
common to cults — any cults, religious or otherwise.
We have already touched on the first —
the Guru is always right.
No matter what the leader says or how crazy it sounds, the leader is always right.
Nobody dares to contradict or criticize the leader. It just isn't done.

And then there is
Denigration of competing
sects, cults, or religions.
A corollary to cults' claims of having The Only Way is the assertion that
"the other people" do not have The Way. "They" are
all misguided and missing the boat, and "they" won't be going to Heaven.

The cult members are
special — they are morally and spiritually superior to the common
rabble who haven't been "saved" and who don't have The Big
Answer.

Another common cult characteristic the we have seen is the demand for
Surrender to the Cult.
You can't just join the group; you have to surrender to the cult and give
it everything — your life, your mind, your heart, your loyalty,
your obedience, and even your soul.
(And
all of your money will be welcome too.)

An Oxford theologian observed that the students who became involved with Buchmanism
were obsessed with it:

Then there are the constant put-downs — the cult characteristic of
You Are Always Wrong:
"You have been defeated by sin",
"You are so sinful that you are insane", and
"You are hiding some giant sin that keeps you separated from God".

It is one thing to say that God-control is the only true policy.
It is another thing to make it a reality in the life of a nation. ...
It is the super-statesmen who make God-control their program, who will solve
the ills of mankind and usher in lasting peace. ...
Statesmen everywhere are becoming convinced that this is the only lasting program...
Frank Buchman, speaking at Geneva, Switzerland, 15 September 1935, quoted inRemaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 112.

Only a great spiritual experience
on the part of national leaders of every party, class and creed will
ever make any world conference or any League of Nations a workable basis
for bringing peace. Such efforts must be God-controlled.
Mark you, there is no alternative.
Frank Buchman, speaking in a BBC radio broadcast, 27 November 1938,Remaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
pages 121.(Notice that Bill Wilson learned the "spiritual experience" jargon from
Frank Buchman, too.)

The only possible alternatives today are collapse or God-control.
And collapse is simply the selfishness of all of us together.
Collapse or God-control.
Frank Buchman, speaking in a transatlantic radio broadcast from London, 9 August 1936,
quoted inRemaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 77.
(Notice Buchman's repeated use of
the Either/Or propaganda technique:
Give the audience only two extreme choices, and pressure them to choose between
something very objectionable, or what Buchman wishes them to choose:
"Mark you, there is no alternative. Collapse or God-control.
War or Moral Re-Armament. Guidance or Guns.")

One year ago we met at Interlaken, Switzerland, under the threat of war.
The thought that riveted the attention of the world at that time was
"Guidance or Guns."
The intervening months have only served to emphasize the truth of that
alternative. It is clearer now than ever before that Moral Re-Armament
is the essential foundation for any world settlement.
The next step is for men and women in every nation to enlist in MRA for
the duration.
Frank Buchman, speaking at the Second World Assembly for Moral Re-Armament,
22 July 1939,Remaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 144.

We will find our national security only in Moral Re-Armament.
Frank Buchman, speaking at the Second World Assembly for Moral Re-Armament,
22 July 1939,Remaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 145.

In 1934 and 1935, Buchman toured Europe. When he stopped off in Denmark,
he declared:

The world needs a miracle. Miracles of science have been the wonder of the
age. But they have not brought peace and happiness to the nations.
A miracle of the spirit is what we need.
Frank Buchman, speaking at Kronberg, Denmark,
Whit Sunday, 1935, quoted inRemaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 157.

It isn't the duty of the "miracles of science" like penicillin to make the
nations happy. It isn't that kind of a drug. (Nevertheless, penicillin often
did make people happy when it saved them or their children from death.)

Light bulbs were invented to light the night, not to bring
"peace and happiness to the nations."

And the purpose of radio was to broadcast information and music, not
to bring "peace and happiness to the nations."

Frank Buchman was way off base when he
demanded that science do everything from end the Great Depression to
prevent World War Two —
to "bring peace and happiness to the nations".
Then Buchman implied that
because science didn't do that, that superstitious, irrational Buchmanism was
the only answer to all of the world's problems.

Geoffrey Williamson reported:

...America was a big place... and on the eve of his [Buchman's] departure after
seven prosperous years, he said: "We are in a global work.
MRA is the one hope of the world."Inside Buchmanism: an independent inquiry into the Oxford Group
Movement and Moral Re-Armament, Geoffrey Williamson, page 139.

One famous follower, Joe Scott, said:

"The world is full of men who are bitter, who are creating a world without
God. In the present struggle of ideologies Frank Buchman is meeting
the issues head on. As we stand at the crossroads of history there is
only one answer and Frank Buchman has the answer." ...
"The only adequate answer to the hate in the world is Frank Buchman's
philosophy of Moral Re-Armament."Frank Buchman's Secret, Peter Howard, pages 89-90.

Other Buchmanites declared that MRA was "the ideology that alone can
save the world from
Communism."93
And the Buchmanite Roger Hicks declared,

Industry is coming to realise that unless it supports MRA, there will
be nothing left for it to support.The Mystery of Moral Re-Armament, Tom Driberg, page 149.

"When God has control, a nation finds her true destiny.
Only a God-controlled nation can lead the world into sanity and
peace."(64)
This is the only way in which peace will be secured.
"World peace will only come through nations which have achieved
God-control."(60)The Message of Frank Buchman, R. C. Mowat, pages 22-23.
The "(60)" and "(64)" refer to pages 60 and 64 of
the book of Frank Buchman's speeches, Remaking the World.

So a small but global conspiracy of religious believers —
i.e.: Moral Re-Armament — is the only way to save the world...

Sir Sikander Hyat Khan, when Premier of the Punjab, declared
publicly that the spirit of change is the beacon light
in a dark world. That whether Britain retains or relinquishes
her interest there, M R A holds the only answer to the problems
of India.Ideas Have Legs, Peter Howard (1946), page 149.

A. J. Russell reported that Frank Buchman and his followers had a panacea:

As Hugh Redwood has it: they were out to change lives on a colossal scale
as the one solution of every world problem.
[Italics in the original.]For Sinners Only, A. J. Russell,
(Harper & Brothers, New York and London, 1932), page 20.

Two life-long Buchmanites declared:

MRA points the way. It is God's answer for this generation.Moral Re-Armament: What Is It?, Basil Entwistle and John McCook Roots, pub. 1967,
page 127.

In 1936, an election year in the U.S.A., Buchman said in a radio broadcast from Philadelphia:

Have you ever thought where America's real safety lies?
America's safety lies in God-control.
God-controlled individuals,
God-controlled homes, God-controlled schools, God-controlled industry,
God-controlled politics, God-controlled nations.
This means that everybody takes his orders from God.
...
God is the person
that the American voter has got to reckon with in the coming election.
The real question is, "Will God control America?"
Frank Buchman, speaking in a radio broadcast on the NBC network from
Philadelphia, 19 June 1936, quoted inRemaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
pages 68 and 71,
andInside Buchmanism: an independent inquiry into the Oxford Group
Movement and Moral Re-Armament, Geoffrey Williamson, page 205.

And Marcus Bach reported:

On June 4, 1938, while two thousand of his followers gathered at
Stockbridge, Massachusetts, he [Buchman] telephoned from London, "America
must re-arm spiritually or all is lost!"
On the night of May 15, 1939, fifteen thousand gathered at Madison Square Garden
to see pageantry, hear speeches, and listen to transatlantic telephone messages
from London believers who said, "Moral Re-Armament is the only hope."They Have Found A Faith, by Marcus Bach, page 126.

In a rousing open-air meeting five thousand Groupers heard Frank say:
"Civilization is tottering on the brink of collapse. Only the God-controlled
process can save the world from sin, war, poverty, and all other current evils."They Have Found A Faith, by Marcus Bach, page 149.

The Oxford Group's aim ever since the last war has been to give a whole
new pattern for statesmanship and a whole new level of responsible thinking —
faculties only given to men who are living under God's guidance, who
are changed through daily contact with God and through daily obedience to God.
Frank Buchman, speaking at the First World Assembly for Moral Re-Armament,
at Interlaken, Switzerland, 2 September 1938, quoted inRemaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman, Frank N. D. Buchman,
page 157.So, only those who practice Buchmanism get the special new mind-powers?

Frank Buchman felt that it was "natural" that he and his followers would end
up running the world:

In inspired democracy "leadership goes to the spiritually fit", for
"the people naturally choose as leaders those who are most clearly led
by God." (108) It is "a new leadership, free from the bondage of fear,
rising above personal and national ambition and responsive to the direction
of God's will." (156)
Such leaders are "super-statesmen who make God-control their
programme." (112)The Message of Frank Buchman, R. C. Mowat, page 16.
(The numbers in parentheses are page numbers in
the book of Frank Buchman's speeches, Remaking the World.)

Likewise, the propaganda book Moral Re-Armament — What Is It?
first declared that there is no dictatorship in Moral Re-Armament, and then,
on the very same page, it says "Leadership goes to the morally and
spiritually fit." In other words, to the leaders of
Moral Re-Armament, who are allegedly more spiritual than anybody
else.116

In addition, Buchmanites claimed that other religions were
"meaningless":

"Religion never meant anything" that is what the Groupers
say almost invariably.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 124.

Some admit that they have had a religious teaching as children, but that
"it never meant anything"; others that they have had no teaching
at all and so, of course, religion for them, too, "never meant
anything".
Others say that they have practiced religion to the extent of trying
to do their best and going to church, but, once again,
"it never meant anything".Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 124.

Members of Alcoholics Anonymous gave the same kind of testimony in the Big Book:

I had been brought up to believe in God, but I know that until I
found this A.A. program, I had never found or known faith in the
reality of God, the reality of His power that is now with me in
everything I do.The Big Book, 3rd Edition, page 341.

And the Alcoholics Anonymous World Services Trustee Milton A. Maxwell quoted another
A.A. member as saying:

I didn't know what peace of mind or serenity was until I found my own Higher Power...
An A.A. member, quoted in
The Alcoholics Anonymous Experience: A Close-Up View For Professionals,
Milton A. Maxwell, Ph.D., page 127.

And other A.A. members say,

I always believed in God, but could never put that belief
meaningfully into my life. Today, because of Alcoholics Anonymous,
I now trust and rely on God, as I understand Him...Daily Reflections; A Book of Reflections by A.A. members for A.A. members,
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., 1990, January 1, page 9.

But it is surprising that Dr. Buchman should frequently take
the opportunity of making gibes at the Church. When convert after
convert had testified at a Sunday evening meeting, I have heard
him say from the platform, "Look at that now! Any other
institution would be glad to have that result in a year. We
have achieved it in three days!"Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 108.

"When the Churches fail — God sends a man,"
writes one of these [disciples of Buchman], and we gather that
in this case the man is Dr. Frank Buchman who is given a place
beside St. Francis (who loved the poor!), Martin Luther and
John Wesley.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 108.

(Who says that the churches had failed? Failed how? Failed to do what?)

And Rev. Richardson reported:

...the leaders of the Groups "will brook no criticism, and rule it out
as 'unguided'"
(The Record, Nov. 18, 1932).
"This refusal to tolerate criticism," observes the Bishop of Durham,
"is the more indefensible in the case of the Groupists since they
exhibit in their judgement of the older forms of Christianity a severity
which is neither charitable nor just"
(The Group Movement, 2nd Ed., Part I, pp. 35-36).The Groups Movement, The Most Rev. John A. Richardson, page 19.
Morehouse Publishing Co., Milwaukee, Wis., 1935.

Such criticism of older churches shows the adolescent character of the
Oxford Groups. Frank Buchman's "movement" began with
groups of college students, and
Buchmanism took on an adolescent attitude which it never outgrew.
Just like an angry teenager who declares that his parents don't know
anything, Buchman's young followers declared that the old churches were
ineffective, meaningless, and useless, and those followers were quick
to assume that they had something brand new which the old fogies were
too dim-witted to see.

The Groupist ignores the history of Christianity, and regards
the system of the Church as too apparently ineffective
to command acceptance. He moves at a stride from the Age of Apostles
to the present time, and assumes that the centuries of Christian
experience have nothing to teach him. Surely this is a position
which cannot seriously be defended.The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction,
Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D. (the Bishop of Durham), 1933, page 28.

The 'Groupists' are curiously unconscious of previous essays in extra-ecclesiastical
revivalism, inspired like their own by the ideal of a restored
'first-century Christianity,' and also finding in the New Testament
at once their credentials and their models.
The claim of originality is of course characteristic of new movements...
Youth tends ever to megalomania.The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction,
Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D. (the Bishop of Durham),
1933, page 30.

Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, had friends in the Oxford Group.
He wrote about Lord Salisbury:

Towards the end of his life he was somewhat attracted by the movement led by Dr. Frank
Buchman, that for no good reason arrogated to itself the title of 'Oxford Group'.
I do not doubt that this evangelistic venture has brought comfort and
assurance to many people, who would say that it had been the means of changing their
entire life by opening for them a door of direct approach to God. For many to whom
the regular rule and worship of the Church had made little appeal, or who had let go their
faith, the Group appeared to carry a message of hope, the value
of which was not to be under-rated.
But to the ordinary practising Christian, on the other hand, an irritating
feature of the Group has been the assumption on the part of many of those who were
caught up in it that they had discovered something entirely new, whereas there
was nothing whatever in the movement that was not readily available to all
Christians in far more just balance through the Christian religion.Fulness Of Days, The Earl of Halifax, page 155.

After too many "House Parties", Marjorie Harrison wrote:

Is religion in all its aspects nothing but a drug to man's
intelligence? ...
During a House Party you get a little tired of such expressions as
"this crowd"
and
"a quality of life"
and
"this fellowship",
and the word
"vision"
is worked to death.
"And then I came in touch with this crowd.
They had something I lacked. Their quality of life made me decide
to surrender my life to God. Now I live my life under guidance.
Since I have been in this fellowship I have had a vision of how
I may change my home and my college...."
I, I, I, I, ad nauseam. That is the jargon.
It is most unconvincing.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 128.

Time after time you hear new converts saying that they were first
attracted to the Group because "these people have something
that I lacked". This little something some others haven't got
is usually described as happiness or joy. The truth is that that
"little something" is
a happy capacity for a facile credulity.
The majority of those who are attracted by the teaching
have this capacity in some measure, whether they are aware of it
or not. Otherwise there would be a very small Group and a much
better one.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 86.

Bill Wilson wrote the same kind of things about the joy of membership
in an A.A. group:

Life will take on new meaning.
To watch people recover, to see them help others, to watch loneliness vanish,
to see a fellowship grow up about you, to have a host of friends — this is
an experience you must not miss.The Big Book, 3rd edition, William G. Wilson,
page 89.

Many a man, yet dazed from his hospital experience, has stepped over the
threshold of that home into freedom. Many an alcoholic who entered there
came away with an answer.
He succumbed to that gay crowd inside, who
laughed at their own misfortunes and understood his. Impressed by those
who visited him at the hospital,
he capitulated entirely
when, later,
in an upper room of this house, he heard the story of some man whose
experience closely tallied with his own.
The expression on the faces
of the women, that indefinable something in the eyes of the men, the
stimulating and electric atmosphere of the place, conspired to let him
know that here was haven at last.A.A. Big Book, William G. Wilson, Chapter 11,
A Vision For You, page 160.

Bill Wilson clearly described three common cult characteristics there:

Since when do you "succumb" and "capitulate" to a cure for a disease?
(You don't.)
Bill Wilson was inviting the new prospects to
abandon their reservations,
dump their logical
thinking minds into the trash can, and
"surrender utterly" to the cult, pure
and simple. Like Step Three says:
We "Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care
of God, as we understood Him."
Turn our wills over?
God does not demand that you surrender your will to Him and become a mindless slave
without any will of your own.
Brainwashers, slave owners, military drill sargeants, fascists, and cult leaders do that.

Oh yes, it is just so much fun to be a member of a cult. It's all so wonderful.

Personal testimonies
of earlier converts, who tell stories of their wonderful conversions,
of how the cult totally changed their lives for the better,
to convince newcomers that they too should surrender their minds and
join the cult.

Likewise, Marty Mann wrote about "the fellowship":

This wasn't "religion" — this was freedom! Freedom from anger and
fear, freedom to know happiness and love.
... I found I had come home at last, to my own kind.The Big Book, 3rd edition, Marty Mann,
the story Women Suffer Too, page 228.

Another A.A. member said of a non-member:

You poor guy. I feel so sorry for you. You're not an alcoholic.
You can never know the pure joy of recovering within the Fellowship of
Alcoholics Anonymous.The Big Book, 3rd Edition, page 334.

And Bill continued:

You say, "...I know I must get along without liquor,
but how can I? Have you a sufficient substitute?"
Yes, there is a substitute, and it is
vastly more than that. It is a fellowship in Alcoholics Anonymous.
There you will find release from care,
boredom and worry. Your imagination will be fired.
Life will mean something at last.
The most satisfactory years of your existence lie
ahead. Thus we find the fellowship, and so will you.A.A. Big Book, William G. Wilson, Chapter 11,
A Vision For You, page 152.

"Life will take on new meaning"?"Life will mean something at last"?As if life has no meaning outside of the "fellowship" of a cult religion?
Don't love, marriage, children, work, accomplishments,
health or sickness, life and death mean anything?

Well, Dr. Alexander Lowen wrote:

Narcissists
are more concerned with how they appear than what they feel.
Without a solid sense of self, they experience life as empty and meaningless.Narcissism, Denial of the True Self, Alexander Lowen, M.D.,
page 76.

Moral Re-Armament cannot be honestly opposed on intellectual grounds
because it is basic truth. MRA is built on incontrovertible moral truth,
whose effectiveness, however it is applied throughout the world,
cannot be gainsaid.
So opposition to Moral Re-Armament has special significance.
It always comes from the morally defeated.Remaking Men, by Paul Campbell, M.D., and Peter Howard, page 66.

In his charge against the Oxford Groups, Dr. Herbert Hensley Henson, the Bishop of
Durham, quoted Rev. C. M. Chavasse...

'I have found many of the rank and file of Group members eager and teachable.
But not the leaders. They will brook no criticism and rule it out as
"unguided".
Even if the invitation to "come in and change us" is accepted,
it is soon found that real criticism is resented — as many have discovered
to their great unhappiness.
This is especially the case at Oxford where the Groups are
established as a cult, and strongly organized with a headquarters and a band
of full-time workers; and where, what one is bound to term, their
intolerance and exclusiveness is a strong and distressing feature.
... and the result of experience would seem to show that the circumference
of the Movement is much sounder than the centre; so that the deeper
you penetrate into its system the more unhappy you feel.'The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction, Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D.
(the Bishop of Durham), 1933, page 35.

That is also a good description of most cults in general:
They often have a pleasant, inviting, and attractive exterior,
and appear to be good and virtuous and spiritual and admirable to the public,
but the core is rotten. The more one gets into a cult, the worse it gets.
After a new member joins, he finds the wonderful publicly-advertised
virtues negated by more sinister teachings. As
Daniel Shaw observed,

"Once membership is established, the messages are switched to ever-increasing
demands for obedience, submission and dependence. The actual value system
of a cult is often the antithesis of the system it advertises."Traumatic Abuse in Cults; An Exploration of an Unfamiliar
Social Problem,
Daniel Shaw, CSW.

The Bishop Dr. Henson also wrote:

Before proceeding to consider the distinctive procedures of the 'Groups'
movement, there is one general characteristic to which I must direct your
attention, and which must certainly arouse the gravest misgivings
in the mind of every considering and instructed Christian.
I mean, its attitude of absolute authority and arrogant superiority
towards all who dissent from its claims or disapprove its methods.
This characteristic is, of course, a familiar mark of sectarianism.
The early Quakers were carried to strange excesses by their persuasion that
they were divinely inspired. They also faced their fellow Christians in the
tone of men who had a unique and infallible assurance of truth, whose witness
could only be rejected by those who were blinded by prejudice or enslaved by
sin. Similarly, the 'Groupists' adopt a tone of absolute authority, and
do not scruple to assume that criticism of their procedures can only issue from
morally disqualified persons. An illustration is provided to my hand by a new
volume written by a prominent leader of the Oxford 'Groupists', the Rev.
Geoffrey Allen, Fellow and Chaplain of Lincoln College.
I read this book with the more careful attention, since its author is one of
those younger Oxford scholars whose work in theology and criticism justifies the
largest hopes. Here is a book, I thought, which will be free from the
vulgarity of popular journalism, such as marked Mr. Russell's deplorable
volume, and will show no trace of the naïve arrogance of ignorant
fervour which may be expected in the narratives of converts.
Mr. Allen is possessed of considerable literary power, and whatever he writes
is pleasant to read. But my satisfaction could go no farther.
The book confirmed my worst fears. Its tone of assured infallibility
revolted me. In the true spirit of fanaticism it disallows all criticism
which is not conditioned by submission to the movement.
In effect, it identifies 'Groupism' and Christianity so completely as to
use with respect to the one that absolute language of Divine claim which
belongs properly only to the other.
A perusal of Groupist literature has compelled me to conclude that Mr. Allen
is genuinely representative of the leaders of the movement.
This attitude of absolute claim which admits of no alternative save complete
acceptance is doubly regrettable. On the one hand, it ties the movement
fast to its own errors, for infallibility always involves this consequence
to all who are unwise enough to claim it that it prohibits reformation.
On the other hand, it makes impossible that ultimate reconciliation of 'Groups'
with the Church which every Churchman who recalls the dolorous history
of previous separations would desire to effect.The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction, Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D.,
1933, pages 33-34.

(Note that Rev. Geoffrey Allen, the enthusiastic young clergyman who
wrote the "deplorable volume",
changed his mind about the Oxford Groups
in a few years' time, and broke away from the
Groups.109)

The faithful Buchmanite Arthur James "A. J." Russell, who wrote two
books of praise of Frank Buchman, complained in one of them about the
criticism that the Oxford Group was receiving:

If you ask people to make radical changes in their lives and they don't obey,
they must pick holes in you. As Canon Grensted has it: "When something
like the Group comes along and suggests that God be put in the first place
always, instead of tenth, and people find their disordered sentiments
threatened, they naturally begin to feel annoyed."For Sinners Only, A. J. Russell, pages 265-266.

A. J. Russell was actually so arrogant
that he equated the Oxford Group Movement
with God. Russell was really world-class arrogant. He declared that
people who would not obey
him and put the Oxford Group first in their lives were, in his mind,
refusing to "put God in the first place",
and that's why they criticized Frank Buchman and the Oxford Group.
(That's the propaganda trick of
False Equality.
Frank Buchman and his cult did not equal God.
Refusal to obey A. J. Russell and Frank Buchman was not
refusal to obey God.)

And that word "obey" is really something else.
Apparently, Russell assumed that complete strangers were supposed
to obey him and the other
Oxford Group recruiters when they came
around, presumably because the Groupists had orders straight
from God and knew God's Will and knew what was best for everybody else, while
the common rabble did not.
(And once again, they used false equality — the recruiters would say
that you should obey God, but they really expected you to obey them.)
No wonder the Member of Parliament from Oxford, A. P. Herbert,
said that "the Buchmanites' methods were fascist-like and
their evangelists Nazi-like."

In the early days, before the London newspaper reporter A. J. Russell was
"changed" into a true believer who never criticized Buchman,
Russell wanted to write a series of neutral, balanced, articles about Buchmanism.
Russell discovered that Frank Buchman would not tolerate even
the slightest criticism of his movement:

...Mr. Russell went on to suggest that, as in the case of
the "My Religion" series, readers should be invited to
air their views for and against the Movement.
"Oh dear, no!" said Dr. Buchman. He reinforced his own
opinion — quite a sound opinion on the advantages of newspaper
discussions — with the startling declaration that the Holy
Spirit's guidance was against the scheme.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 119.

Likewise, Peter Howard,
the fascist disciple of Frank Buchman who assumed
the leadership of the Oxford Groups/MRA organization after Buchman's death, wrote:

...Christians forget that Christ was crucified not because he was wrong
but because He was right. There was one of Christ's contemporaries who,
while agreeing that the work being done was good, always disagreed with
the methods and thought he could do things better. He was critical of
the way money was spent, critical of the company Christ kept, critical of
his comrades. His name was Judas.
This is not to suggest that Buchman was like Christ or that all his critics
are like Judas....Britain and the Beast, Peter Howard, 1963, page 106.

Note the propaganda tricks of
denial and
reversal of reality.
Peter Howard clearly suggested that Frank Buchman's critics were acting just like Judas,
and then Howard immediately declared that he wasn't suggesting it.

Also notice the propaganda trick
False Analysis of History.
Jesus Christ was not crucified
"because He was right"; He was killed because he upset, threatened, and
scared the local established power figures, especially the Jewish
church leaders, who feared that Jesus would both overthrow them and
start a revolution that would cause the Romans to punish them all very harshly.

Peter Howard continued with his bitter complaints about criticism of MRA:

So many people are snobs of intellect. They write well, make money, gain titles
or preach splendidly but are helpless and barren when they meet a man
in need. They shine before men but change nobody.
They criticize those who have less polish and recognition than themselves,
forgetting that the first journeymen of Christ were fishermen, shepherds
and craftsmen of hand and heart, not crafty of head and great in human eyes.
It is impossible in the space of this book to take up and refute all accusations
and charges made against men and women of Moral Re-Armament. But many of them
are self-contradictory and others are made with a shallowness of understanding
or a denial of reason which makes them worthless.Britain and the Beast, Peter Howard, 1963, page 112-113.

Peter Howard did not refute a single criticism of the Oxford Groups or Moral
Re-Armament there. He just used the propaganda techniques
Personal Attacks on Critics (Ad Hominem),
Name Calling,
anti-intellectual Appeal To Stupidity,
and
Hit-And-Run
to try to dismiss all of the criticism that he and his fellow cult
members were getting.
Peter Howard launched an ad hominem attack on his critics,
called them a variety of names,
and accused them of being "polished snobs of intellect",
and then ran away without actually answering any of the
charges against the Oxford Groups, by claiming that the criticism wasn't worth refuting.

Peter Howard also used the propaganda trick of
Unsubstantiated Inference,
saying of his critics that
"They shine before men but change nobody."
Well, neither did the Buchmanites.
The Oxford Groups and Moral Re-Armament were
notorious for not making any lasting changes
in their converts. People would claim to be "changed" at a rally or
house party, but were very soon back to their same old bad habits.

Marjorie Harrison spoke of the emotional appeal of Buchmanism to
prospective new recruits, and the suppression of criticism:

The emotional appeal would have less influence if every
attempt at intellectual honesty — called criticism by the Group —
was not extinguished. Criticism from outside the Group cannot be
prevented.
It is combated not by a defence or an answer, but by an
assumption of indifference. It is merely an assumption of indifference
for criticism is desperately feared just as advertisement is welcomed.
Within the Group criticism is absolutely forbidden.
This is for an excellent reason. The insidiously harmful teachings
cannot be defended.
Stripped of these elaborations there would stand
revealed the simple and sane teaching of Christianity: the Christianity
that has been found difficult and not tried. Buchmanism has been
tried and found easy and swallowed wholesale.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), pages 67-68.

(Notice that A.A. uses exactly the same "assumption of indifference" to criticism.
A.A. leaders refuse to argue with critics, and claim that they have "no opinion" on "outside issues."
And anything that they don't want to talk about is called an outside issue, no matter whether it is the rape of women in
A.A., the immense A.A. dropout rate and failure rate, coercive recruiting,
telling sick people not to take their medications,
junior cult leaders setting up their own cults and exploiting newcomers, or the A.A. leaders stealing the money.)

She continued:

Dr. Buchman carefully trains his followers to carry out
his technique of revivalism.
Several of the rules seem to
have been made for the express purpose of side-tracking
intelligent inquiry, the displacing of intellectual honesty
by subversive emotional appeal and, above all the muffling-down
of criticism. Two of his precepts are: "Avoid argument"
and "Aim to conduct the interview yourself".
The Movement sets itself like a blank wall against either criticism
or advice. Its members are bristled against it even if it cannot
be expressed. The audiences at the Central Hall meetings had
no means of expressing politely any criticism...
That worldly, but extremely shrewd weekly, The New Yorker,
has described Buchmanism as "a form of evangelism which
combines the advantages of mysticism, mesmerism, spiritualism,
eroticism, psycho-analysis, and high-power salesmanship."Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), pages 33-34.

A House-Party audience is almost entirely composed of adherents to
the Movement or those partially convinced. Buchman obviously does
not expect anything but an assent to his demands, for if anyone asks
so much as a question, he becomes flurried immediately. He shouts,
blusters, ties himself into knots and is usually extricated by
his followers. He is always evasive. A definite criticism voiced
at a meeting spoils the meeting for him.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), page 114.

Likewise, contemporary clergymen wrote:

...the leaders of the Groups "will brook no criticism, and rule it out
as 'unguided'"
(The Record, Nov. 18, 1932).
"This refusal to tolerate criticism," observes the Bishop of Durham,
"is the more indefensible in the case of the Groupists since they
exhibit in their judgement of the older forms of Christianity a severity
which is neither charitable nor just"
(The Group Movement, 2nd Ed., Part I, pp. 35-36).The Groups Movement, The Most Rev. John A. Richardson, page 19.
Morehouse Publishing Co., Milwaukee, Wis., 1935.

In proportion as a person is sure that God is speaking to him
clearly and distinctly so will he ascribe criticisms of his work
to evil forces and feel himself persecuted. It is his simple view
of the relation between God and man that makes Buchman so sure
of the "Guidance" that comes to him in his "Quiet Time."
This must be an important factor in the sense of persecution that one
finds not only in him but among his followers.The Oxford Group; Its History and Significance,
Walter Houston Clark, page 111.

Indeed. If you are convinced that you are talking directly to God and
getting your orders directly from Him, then someone who disagrees with you
and opposes your activities must of necessity be evil and working
for The Forces of Darkness. Why else, how else,
could anyone possibly be opposed to your divine work?
When you are absolutely certain that you are getting your instructions directly from
God, that simply leaves no room for humility or tolerance of
any other people's differing opinions or viewpoints.

T. Willard Hunter as he appeared on stage in MRA theatrical productions in 1943

In Frank's fellowship, there were plenty of internal, individual mea culpas.
Indeed, assertions that "I'm wrong"
were de rigueur for the MRA team person.
"A small sense of sin means a small sense of Christ; a great
sense of sin means a great sense of Christ."
The line in the movie Love Story, "Love means you never have to
say you're sorry," was opposite to the team approach.
For labor-management problems and other conflicts, honest apology was
"the high road to honest peace." One of the cleverest MRA songs to hit
the stage was Blanton Belk and his sisters harmonizing of "Sorry is
a magic little word."62
But this did not apply to the corporate entity, and certainly not to
Frank Buchman. There was never any corporate confession of sin.
All major decisions for decades, and a host of minor ones as well, were
made by the leader. He was guided by God. Therefore to criticize aims
and strategies of the force as a whole was to suggest that Frank's touch
with the Almighty had on occasion been flawed. An[d] that was to think
the unthinkable. If such a reflection should be shared on the inside,
its author would be regarded as needing attention to his thinking or his
piety, or both. If such questions were raised by someone on the outside,
chances were good that the originator was either subversive or living
an immoral life.62 From the revue Ideas Have Legs, Washington, D.C., 1947.World Changing Through Life Changing: The Story of Frank Buchman and
Moral Re-Armament; A Thesis for the Degree of Master of Sacred Theology
at Andover Newton Theological School,
T. Willard Hunter, 1977, pages 70-71.

Newcomers and the rank and file members were expected to confess that they
were guilty of everything
imaginable, but Frank Buchman would never confess that he or the Oxford Groups
or Moral Re-Armament had ever made any big, serious, fundamental errors.
He couldn't, because he was supposedly under the infallible Guidance of God, every
minute of his life. To admit that he had made mistakes would be to admit that
he was not a perfect channel for the Voice of God.

Marjorie Harrison described her experiences as a newcomer to the
Oxford Group meetings:

...you are bound to fall under the spell of the most
disarming friendliness that you have ever encountered.
[It's called
"love bombing".]
The friendliness continues as long as you are a hearer of the word
as interpreted by people anxious to add your soul's scalp to the
rest of their collection.
They will bear — for a little time — with some criticism. But
if you fail to acquiesce in conviction and that fairly quickly,
then you are no longer interesting, and in the end, you find
yourself exhorted from the platform to "pack up your
criticisms with your luggage and GO — you are of no use."
One young man, at that last meeting of the Eastbourne House Party,
stung by this, rose to his feet and, an almost lone critic in the
midst of an audience composed of Groupers, or those sympathetic
to the Movement, flung back in a few words the challenge of all
those thousands of anxious and serious people who fail to see in
the Group the answer to their own or the world's problems.
"I have been afraid of God all my life," he said.
"I have been hag-ridden by God. I came to learn. I cannot
accept all your teaching, and so you tell me I am no use. You
tell me to go. I will go."
"Yes. Go!" said Frank from the platform. "Go and
talk it over outside."
And he went. He was the most desperately sincere, the most moving
and the most convincing speaker I heard during the thirteen meetings
of the Group that I attended during that House Party.
Dr. Buchman told me he had sent back an apology. I hope he did
nothing of the sort. The Group owed to him the deepest and
humblest apology for his was the cry of a tormented soul.
A thousand men and women would echo it.
He was the only person in all the House Party who seemed to have
suffered spiritual travail. "Religion never meant anything"
that is what the Groupers say almost invariably.
To this boy religion had obviously meant something.
He had been "hag-ridden" by God.
Religion had been a disrupting force and his life its battlefield.
He did not want the joy and the fun and the thrill offered
by the Group. He rejected the blatantly superstitious interpretation
of the Guidance of God — and because he had courage and deep
feeling, the Group told him to go. They had no use for him.
He was followed from the hall by several young men who were
prepared to "change" but not help him.
But he had been publicly humiliated and his genuine desire for
true guidance had been rejected.
In that incident you see revealed the whole weakness of the Group.Saints Run Mad; A Criticism of the "Oxford" Group Movement,
Marjorie Harrison (1934), pages 123-125.

Another common bad characteristic of cults that Buchman's Groups displayed
was dishonesty, deceit, and wild exaggeration of successes and praise,
accompanied by minimization and denial of faults and criticism.
Rev. John A. Richardson wrote:

I have said that there is no room for doubt that many lives are being
transformed through the activities of the Groups Movement.
It will not do, however, to accept at their face value all the jubilant
reports of victories won that are trumpeted abroad with such persistent
optimism.
That notable victories have been won will not be denied, but it is quite
certain that in their announcement there has been not seldom gross
exaggeration.
The fact is that the publicity work of the Movement is extraordinarily
effective, and by its aid the achievements of the Groups has been widely
heralded, while nothing has been said of their frequent failures.
Miss Marjorie Harrison comments ironically upon that fact in her
description of one of the gatherings of the Groups in London, of
which she was an eye-witness. The Groups preach "'absolute honesty,'"
she says, "and Dr. Buchman, standing on a platform, holds up a
Canadian newspaper and draws attention to the streamer headlines
in favour of the Group. He reads extracts; he reels off figures;
he gives the impression that all Canada has been swept into the
Movement. He does not show the other side of the picture. He is
entirely one-sided. There is no mention of the scathing criticisms
and denunciations that met the Group" (Saints Run Mad,
p. 145).
Speaking within my own knowledge, the Groups had recently a great
campaign in St. John, N. B., for the success of which the most
extravagant claims were made. Enormous crowds were naturally
attracted to the meetings, and not a few individuals received
spiritual help, who are today, I am sure, witnesses to the fact.
It is undoubtedly true, however, that a vast number of those present
at the various meetings were there out of curiosity alone, and
remain untouched. Yet an official statement was sent through the
press from one end of Canada to the other which was calculated to
give the impression that the entire city, and other parts of the
province, had been stirred to the very depths. It was a piece of
flamboyant advertising for which there was absolutely no foundation
in fact.
Such cases of publicity exaggeration are, as I have said, not at all
uncommon. Thus the Rev. Samuel M. Shoemaker, Jr., writes as follows
in an article entitled, "The Church and the Oxford Group,"
The Living Church, Jan. 21, 1933:
The reception which the Oxford Group had in Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto,
can only be called in St. Paul's words a 'triumph in Christ.'
Night after night, thousands of people came out to hear the simple
message of witness from varied types."
So far as the vast attendance at the meetings is concerned, the
statement is, no doubt, entirely accurate. In view of the world-wide
publicity given to the activities of the Movement, it could hardly
be otherwise.
When Mr. Shoemaker goes on, however, to quote with approval the
statement of "a business man from Ottawa" that, as a result
of the campaign, there were more Oxford Groups in that city than there
were bridge parties, one may be pardoned for registering a doubt.
For myself, I can only say that I have gone to some trouble to make
inquiries in reliable quarters recently, and I find nothing to suggest
that the effect of the campaign in Ottawa was of the revolutionary
character claimed by Mr. Shoemaker.
Credit has been claimed by the leaders of the Groups for the most
striking achievements in the arena of political and public life.
The world has repeatedly been told, for example, that the Groups
brought peace and harmony out of political chaos and conflict in
South Africa. ...
[They didn't; see quotes below.]
One would not impute deliberate misstatement, but there is little room
to doubt that, in their enthusiasm, the leaders of the Groups
are guilty of unpardonable exaggeration in the claims for success
that they send out to the world. It is highly probable that
Mr. Henry P. Van Dusen is not far from the truth when he says in his
vivid study of Dr. Buchman in The Atlantic Monthly, July, 1934,
that there is in him a "tendency, almost juvenile in its naïeveté,
to see the virtues of his associates, the quality of their performance,
and the significance of their achievements, somewhat out of true perspective.
This tendency pervades the entire Movement, but it is a contagion caught
from Mr. Buchman's own habitual attitude.The Groups Movement, The Most Rev. John A. Richardson, pages 21-25.
Morehouse Publishing Co., Milwaukee, Wis., 1935.

And Maisie Ward wrote:

It would be a grave mistake to reckon the value of a spiritual movement
merely by counting heads but M. Desplanques, while admitting fully
the great impetus given by the movement to the lives of many, feels
obliged to stress the fact that there is some unreality in the
'Advertisement' atmosphere which boasts of large scale conversions,
while refusing to supply any figures at all. In America he compares the
results in the larger universities to the temperature chart of a fever
patient, so rapid are the rises and falls.The Oxford Groups, Maisie Ward, page 27.

Dr. Herbert Hensley Henson, the Bishop of Durham, wrote:

The 'Groupists' are curiously unconscious of previous essays in
extra-ecclesiastical revivalism, inspired like their own by the ideal
of a restored 'first-century Christianity,' and also finding in
the New Testament at once their credentials and their models.
The claim to originality is of course characteristic of new movements,
and need express nothing worse than the pardonable self-delusion
of enthusiasm. Youth tends ever to megalomania.
Nevertheless
megalomania is a perilous temper, and cannot wisely be left
uncorrected. One previous essay is so recent in time, and so
kindred in character, as to be fresh in our recollection.
A few years ago much public attention was directed to the activities of
the faith healer, Mr. [J. M.] Hickson. These were, he maintained, precisely as the
Groupists maintain with respect to their own movement, an essay in
first-century Christianity. ...
The parallel between Mr. Hickson and the Rev. Frank Buchman is not
limited to their claim that they are reviving 'first-century Christianity'.
Both build much on the results of their work. 'Groupism' is,
in the Rev. S. M. Shoemaker's phrase, 'Religion that Works'.
Mr. Hickson might have adopted the phrase. He was able to produce a list
of witnesses not less impressive than those which are paraded by the
'Groupists'. ...
In South Africa his success was reported to be not less impressive,
and this is the more noteworthy since it is precisely in South Africa
that the success of the 'Groups' is alleged to have been most astonishing.
I observe with some interest that both Mr. Hickson and the 'Groupists' adduce
the evidence of a Presbyterian clergyman, the Rev. E. Macmillan of Pretoria.
He compared Mr. Hickson's mission to a 'spiritual earthquake', a
new thing in his experience, 'more truly and deeply spiritual than the
old-time evangelical revivals.'1
This was in 1922. In 1929 the same gentleman wrote with equal fervour
about the mission of the 'Groupists'. He made, however, no mention
of the 'spiritual earthquake' which, only seven years earlier, had
stirred him so deeply.
During the sessions of the Lamberth Conference in 1930 I asked
several Australian and South African Bishops whether the results of
Mr. Hickson's mission, to which such confident attestation had been
given, had been as extensive and as permanent as might have been
expected, but I found no reason for thinking that either the
physical health or the moral level of the populations had been appreciably
affected. What is the inference?
We cannot surely be mistaken if we think that both Mr. Hickson's
'Faith-healing Mission' and Mr. Buchman's 'Groups' illustrate characteristics
of sect-movements in every age, the tendency of enthusiasts to exaggerate
the originality and the value of their own religious methods, and the
facility with which good Christians, when they handle the New Testament,
may be entangled in a literalism which is equally irrational and perilous.
Mr. Hickson's book, Heal the Sick, published in 1924, should stand
on the student's bookshelf alongside Mr. Russell's book, For
Sinners Only, published in 1932. They are the latest descriptions
we possess of a religious phenomenon which has been recurrent in
Christian experience from the first. We may add that both books
have secured a wide circulation.
1. Vide his letter quoted in Hickson's Heal the Sick.
[Heal the Sick, J. M. Hickson, Methuen & Co., 1924.]The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction, Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D.,
Bishop of Durham, 1933, pages 30-33.

Likewise, the Buchmanite Groups' grand claims of success in changing
many tens of thousands of people into morally-reformed individuals were never
verified, and the changes were simply assumed to be permanent.
The Groups' publications used the
Proof By Anecdote
and
Testimonials
propaganda techniques,
attempting to convince people by overwhelming them with positive testimonial
stories.
Dr. Herbert Hensley Henson, the Bishop of Durham, wrote in 1933:

I observe that Groupist literature is to a large extent composed of
records of 'life-changing'. These are generally anonymous, and in
their circumstances extraordinary.
They are commonly presented in picturesque and dramatic language which
sometimes reproduces the too-familiar features of popular journalism,
and they seem to be designed to bear down opposition by their
cumulative effect, and so to coerce the reluctant understanding
into acceptance of Groupist claims. ...
In these records of Groupist activities
we are given the successes,
but not the failures.
Those who have had the best opportunities for watching the
working of the new movement are impressed by the latter
hardly less than by the former.
I am not thinking mainly of
those woeful instances, of which the
number appears to be disconcertingly large, in which
complete nervous and mental collapse
followed in the wake of the vehement
excitements of Groupism, but rather I have in mind
the very large number of those who have been alienated by
Groupist methods or who, after yielding themselves
to groupist domination, have reacted from it rather calamitously.
There are no statistics more dubious and more misleading than those of
religious conversion, for they are marked by all the defects which can
reduce the value of statistics. They are compiled in circumstances
highly unfavorable to accuracy. The compilers are always interested
persons whose good faith is no guarantee of competence.
They are never checked, and in the nature of the case cannot be confirmed.
In the highly artificial atmosphere of a 'house party', or in the
emotional excitement of a public meeting, when the subtle influence
of 'mass-suggestion' is at its height, and there are the strongest
inducements bearing on individuals to profess what is so plainly
expected and so ardently desired,
it cannot be surprising that
decisions and experiences alleged in perfect sincerity which none
the less may not have been as complete as was supposed, and may not
be as permanent as is assumed. These are registered with exultation
by those who find in them the Divine sanction of their own spiritual
exertions; and they are published to the world without delay.
The clergy often and justly lament the lapse from communion of the majority
of those who have been confirmed. ...
These emotional confessions, made in circumstances of great excitement
under the pressure of crowd-sentiment, do not wear well.
...
Enthusiasm has little staying power, but immense self-confidence.
'Life-changing' is no such prompt and easy achievement as Groupists
seem to suggest.
Such and such evil practices may, of course, be made to cease, and
such and such pious observances be adopted, but veritas temporis filia,
only Time can certify the measure, quality, and permanence
of the change of life. Somewhere in his essays Emerson observes that
the weak point about good resolutions is the fact that, even while
we indulge the luxury of framing them, we know in the background of
our minds that the task of carrying them into effect will have to be
entrusted to the same old incorrigible law-breaker who has so often
betrayed us in the past.The Oxford Groups; The Charge Delivered At The Third Quadrennial Visitation
Of His Diocese Together With An Introduction, Herbert Hensley Henson, D.D.,
1933, pages 37-40.

Rev. John Richardson reported much the same thing:

Nor in a vast number of cases is it safe to assume that the life-changing,
for which credit is so confidently claimed, permanent in character.
It is notorious that no statistics are more open to suspicion, and
none must be more liberally discounted, than those designed to set forth
the results of highly organized and intensive efforts of a revival
character. In the emotional atmosphere of such gatherings, and under the
pressure of "mass suggestion" skilfully and continuously applied,
men and women are too easily swept off their feet into acts of
surrender and profession that are carefully noted, and receive full
publicity, while little is known and less said, of the lapses that so
often follow.
The credit side of the account is kept with care, while the debit side is blank.
There is no reason to believe that this
phenomenon has been absent from the evangelistic efforts of the Groups.
Evidence to that end comes, indeed, from all sides.
Mr. R. H. S. Crossman, Fellow of New College, Oxford, writes as follows
in Oxford and the Groups (p. 105):
"In their recent American tour, the Groups on at least three
occasions — Detroit, Louisville, and Phoenix — found the work
of conversion far harder in towns where they had previously
worked:
still more significant, at Louisville, where two years previously
hundreds had made their surrender, they found only eleven who had
remained in any sense active members."
...
It is not too much to say, I think, that under the magnetic power
of Dr. Buchman's leadership there has been developed in the Groups
an appreciation of the power of publicity, and an astuteness in its
use, that the exponents of high-pressure salesmanship might be
disposed to envy. It is one of the least appealing characteristics
of the Movement, and lies upon its very surface.The Groups Movement, The Most Rev. John A. Richardson, pages 26-28.
Morehouse Publishing Co., Milwaukee, Wis., 1935.

One Oxford Group member,
T. Willard Hunter, did quite a twisty song and dance
as he tried to explain away Frank Buchman's habit of grossly exaggerating his successes,
and even outright lying:

What appears to be exaggeration is party due to a stance which Sam
Shoemaker noted, "All Frank's geese are swans. It is partly his intense
enthusiasm and belief in us which keeps us functioning!"30
Buchman was everlastingly Mr. Positive Thinking and Mr. Possibility Thinking
rolled into one. The glass is never half empty, always half full.
The next person he met was capable of turning the world upside down by the
end of the week. Anyone can recognize there is untold power available to
one who operates that way. I expect also that Frank was confident the Almighty
would not be too severe if he should occasionally exercise a salesman's
license for enthusiasm and stretch a point.
Surely he would be forgiven under the rubric of the Congressional cloak
rooms where gentlemen agree there are times when one must "rise above
principle." It does not negate the impressively solid accomplishments of
the work to concede that it was at times inflated with puffery.30 Harold Begbie, More Twice Born Men, p. 147.World Changing Through Life Changing: The Story of Frank Buchman and
Moral Re-Armament; A Thesis for the Degree of Master of Sacred Theology
at Andover Newton Theological School,
T. Willard Hunter, 1977, page 172.

That is quite a piece of propaganda. More than half of all of those sentences are lies:

"Rise above principle"?

Just like an old Congressman who doesn't feel obligated to tell the truth to the voters?
What is so gentlemanly about that?

And more to the point, what is so "spiritual" about that?
Since when is religion supposed to be just like dirty politics?

And just how does someone "rise above principle"?
Wouldn't that process be better described as "abandoning principles" or
"violating principles", or "betraying principles",
or "sinking into the cesspool of deceptive politics"?

T. Willard Hunter wrote that
'gentlemen agree there are times when one must "rise above principle."'
What gentlemen? So why was it Frank Buchman's "time when he must rise above principle" and
play fast and loose with the facts? What event necessitated that? What end justifies the means?

Hunter also used the propaganda trick of
"Everybody Knows" in this line:
"Anyone can recognize there is untold power available to one who operates that way."
Well silly me, I can't recognize it. I don't see quite what
"untold" spiritual power comes from dishonesty and exaggeration.

And "surely Frank Buchman will be forgiven under the rubric" where
we forgive corrupt politicians?
Huh? What if I don't forgive corrupt politicians?
And more to the point, what if God doesn't?

Frank Buchman's habit of being far less than "Absolutely Honest"
doesn't negate what "impressively solid accomplishments"?

And it's also another
Appeal To Numbers — Just assume that because Frank Buchman succeeded in
attracting thousands of people to a party, that it was a big spiritual event and
an "impressively solid accomplishment".

What Frank Buchman most clearly exemplified was a
narcissistic personality disorder.
He was compulsively giddy and happy and
bubbling over with joy, exaggerating wildly when he told everyone about
what great things he was doing and
how wonderful it all was....
Buchman was giddy and happy and frivolous — except
when someone irritated him by popping his bubble with a pinprick of
honest criticism or an injection of reality, at which time Frank Buchman would
explode in rage.

Narcissists are experts at showing off. Everything they do is calculated to make
the right impression. Conspicuous consumption is for them what religion is
for other people. Narcissists pursue the symbols of wealth, status, and power
with a fervor that is almost spiritual. They can talk for hours about objects
they own, the great things they've done or are going to do, and the
famous people they hang out with. Often, they exaggerate shamelessly...Emotional Vampires: Dealing with People Who Drain You Dry,
Albert J. Bernstein, Ph.D., page 130.

Two thirds of the entire Alcoholics Anonymous "Big Book"
was and is nothing but such anecdotal stories
of A.A. successes, but there isn't a single honest story of an
A.A. failure to be found anywhere in there.
And we were never told when the so-called "miracles" wore off
and the much-publicized successes
relapsed and disappeared.
Bill Wilson didn't honestly report that — he just silently replaced their stories
with more stories from some other people who also claimed that the
wonderful, never-fails, A.A. program had saved their lives.
You will never learn from official A.A. Council-approved literature that
fully 50% of the original
first-edition Big Book authors relapsed and returned to a life
of drinking.

And today, the Alcoholics Anonymous headquarters is becoming more and
more vague about just
how many people A.A. is
really keeping sober, and what the A.A. success rate really is.
On
their triennial membership surveys,
where they count heads and collect data about people's sobriety,
they have even stopped asking critical questions like
"what is the A.A. dropout rate",
because the results are so bad that they are an embarrassment
to the A.A. organization.

Rev. Sam Shoemaker, who was Frank Buchman's right-hand man for twenty years,
wrote an article for The Christian Century magazine
where he sang the praises of his traveling Oxford Group
proselytizing team like this:

All travelers through California make for the Mission Inn, at Riverside.
Soon interested in the group, the managers gave us the lowest rate they
ever quoted, and a house-party of 500 gathered in mid-February.
People came for training, to discover next steps, and took them as
thoroughbreds take hurdles. Others came for their first touch with
a group. A young wife, appalled at the financial catastrophe which had
overtaken her husband almost immediately after their marriage, found a
new security better and beyond a security in money; her witness has
since resulted in spiritual children and grandchildren.
An actor, a dozen clergymen, widows of two Presbyterian missionaries
who nursed resentment against God for the loss of their husbands, at
least six whole families of modern, prosperous pagans, and also several
members on the staff of the inn — all came into new or deeper
experiences of a living Christ.House-Parties Across the Continent, Samuel M. Shoemaker, Jr.,
The Christian Century, August 23, 1933, page 1057.

You know, that sounds just like Bill Wilson's standard raps:

There is talk of people taking their next steps.
Bill talked about Steps a lot.

There is the cultish practice of
calling non-members names like
"pagans".
In A.A. they are called "normies", "flatlanders", "pigeons", and "dry drunks".

Likewise, there is the cultish attitude of
"We are special — the rules
don't apply to us — we get the lowest hotel room price in history because
our work is so special."

There are cultish claims of
having a panacea:
A young housewife found
"new security better and beyond a security in money..."
— Which also implies that the housewife was shallow and limited, mistakenly
concerning herself with silly things like money and the physical survival
of her family. That reflects
You are always wrong.

Both the Oxford Group promoters and Bill Wilson habitually used the
Proof by Anecdote and testimonials
propaganda techniques.
They just reeled off a bunch of stories of conversions, as if that
was proof of something. They didn't report their failures.
And, of course, they never did follow-ups.

They just gave us a bunch of hoopla about
"hundreds saved; thousands saved" and were silent about the
down side. That's also the propaganda technique called
"Observational Selection",
commonly known as "cherry-picking".

Then there is the sponsorship system
(mentoring) that
arranges everyone in a pyramid
with "spiritual children and grandchildren", uplines and downlines.

We especially have to ask the question, "Why would a man do that?
Why would a man act like that? Why would a man behave in such a manner for
his entire life?" Frank Buchman's behavior was so extreme
that it went way beyond mere vanity or ambition or the desire to live in luxury.
It wasn't just a man
wanting to be the leader, or wanting to be admired and called 'a man of God'.
It wasn't just a man putting on airs, and claiming that he was special, and that
God was talking to him all day long.

Specifically, the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder,
as defined by the American Psychiatric Association, are:

301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Diagnostic Criteria

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for
admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and
present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of
the following:

has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates
achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior
without commensurate achievements)Pretty obviously, Frank Buchman thought he was on a mission from God,
destined to save the whole world.

In 1921, at Cambridge, Frank Buchman was bicycling one night when he imagined that
he heard the voice of God saying to him,
"I will use you to remake the world."
Later, in his room, the thought came to him again and again.
Buchman concluded that God was calling him to a great task, and he decided to
accept the commission.97

Buchman imagined that he talked to God, and that God talked back to him, all of the time.

When Buchman claimed that the current
guidance that Oxford Group members (like him) were receiving
was just as authoritative as
the stories in the Bible, he was even putting himself on a level with
the Biblical saints and prophets.

Buchman expected and even demanded that he be acknowledged as superior —
he had to always be lauded as a great spiritual leader, and he
considered anyone who dared to disagree with him to be certainly
wrong, and even immoral and working for the forces of Evil.

And Buchman habitually exaggerated and lied about his
achievements, accomplishments, and talents. Everything about Buchman was
grandiose.

is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
brilliance, beauty, or ideal loveYes, like Absolute Love, Absolute Honesty, Absolute Purity, and Absolute Unselfishness.
And he saw himself as the future minister to the world's leaders.
He thought his "Movement" was going to take over the whole world.

believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only
be understood by, or should associate with, other special or
high-status people (or institutions)Yes, Buchman felt like only associating with millionaires,
political leaders, nobility, and royalty,
and "spiritual" people who agreed with him about everything,
and who would sing his praises unceasingly.

requires excessive admirationObviously true of Frank Buchman. His need for admiration was so extreme that when the London
newspaper reporter A. J. Russell wrote a flattering article about Frank Buchman and his Oxford
Group "house parties", Buchman mailed copies of it to nearly 10,000
people.124

has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations
of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his
or her expectationsObviously yes. He demanded total automatic compliance from others.
They had to "surrender" to him and obey him without question.
And he certainly felt entitled to live a luxurious first-class lifestyle
at other people's expense.

is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others
to achieve his or her own endsYes. Like all cult leaders, Frank Buchman was extremely exploitative.
Buchman didn't care if he wasted other peoples' entire lives, misleading
and deceiving them, getting them to work for him for free in the name of God.

lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
feelings and needs of othersObviously true of Buchman. He was one hard-hearted cold fish and he
didn't care whom he hurt.
And Buchman does not really seem to have cared about their
spiritual well-being either. In spite of some decorative jabber about
giving people
"new or deeper experiences of a living Christ",
Buchman actually showed little concern for whether people got into Heaven
or remained in the church or even remained believers.
Buchman routinely rejected and drove away any and all people who dared
to question or criticize him.

is often envious of others or believes that others are envious
of him or herThat sounds familiar.

shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudesNo question about it.

Associated Features

Vulnerability in self-esteem makes individuals with Narcissistic
Personality Disorder very sensitive to "injury" from criticism or
defeat. Although they may not show it outwardly, criticism may haunt
these individuals and may leave them feeling humiliated, degraded,
hollow and empty. They may react with disdain, rage, or defiant
counterattack. Such experiences often lead to social withdrawal or
an appearance of humility that may mask and protect the grandiosity.
Extreme intolerance of criticism was one of Frank Buchman's worst characteristics.
And yes, he reacted to even a vague hint of criticism
with "disdain, rage, or defiant counterattack".
As Henry P. van Dusen wrote,
"It is significant that Mr. Buchman's career
has left a trail of broken and raw relationships, of men and women
branded as enemies
because they ventured to raise doubt about some
element in his programme or the infallibility of his judgement."

Interpersonal relations are typically impaired due to problems
derived from entitlement, the need for admiration, and the relative
disregard for the sensitivities of others.Totally true of Frank Buchman — The only lasting interpersonal relationships he
had were with grovelling sycophants. He drove everybody else away.
And Buchman felt entitled to first class everything
because he was "working for God"; he had an extreme need for
admiration; and he cruelly disregarded the sensitivities of others.

Though overweening ambition and confidence may lead to
high achievement, performance may be disrupted due to intolerance
of criticism or defeat.Buchman was "Mr. Overweening Ambition" personified. He wanted
to take over the whole world, but his intolerance of criticism and disregard
for the feelings of others brought him even more criticism and opposition.

The tendency to lie, without compunction, is typical of narcissists.Narcissism, Denial of the True Self, Alexander Lowen, M.D.,
page 54.

That fits Frank Buchman too.

Narcissism is rarely absent from charismatic leaders. In fact, it may be
a necessary component of the extravagant self-esteem that charisma is largely based on.A Doomsday Reader: Prophets, Predictors, and Hucksters of Salvation,
edited by Ted Daniels, page 229.

Even Frank Buchman's faithful follower Garth Lean noticed, in July of 1940,

But Buchman, now as always, was unpredictable
[read: unstable].
He shook with rage one day
because a cook had once again produced tough meat. The next day he appeared
at the kitchen door holding a tiny wild flower for her.
'Here you are,' he said. 'This is "self-heal".'On the Tail of a Comet: The Life of Frank Buchman, Garth Lean, pages 294-295.

"There is a gigantic, Olympian quality in F's wrath that is something
to be experienced to be believed. It certainly produces change."On the Tail of a Comet: The Life of Frank Buchman, Garth Lean, page 292.

Sometimes, not infrequently as time went on, Buchman used to shout at his
colleagues. Austin points out that people do sometimes have such tough
hides of self-esteem or hypocrisy that it may be the only way to get
through, yet admits that 'Frank, especially when in pain, was
too violent
in his rebuke'. Dr Irene Gates, who could be stern with him, warned him
sometime in 1941, after he had dressed down some of his colleagues with
a considerable burst of temper, that, if he wished to live, he would have
to forego that kind of explosion.On the Tail of a Comet: The Life of Frank Buchman, Garth Lean, page 470.

Henry P. van Dusen wrote an analysis of Frank Buchman and his movement
for Atlantic Monthly magazine in 1934, and said:

Here we meet another of the most conspicuous marks of the man — his unshakable
certitude in his own 'leading.' Never for a fleeting instant or in any
possible circumstances is he unsure in speech or action.
It makes no difference whether the matter concerns the strategy for winning
a continent or the relief of an over-solemn meeting by an injection of
humor, the right word to say to impress an official whose favor controls
doors of opportunity or the right necktie to wear to win the confidence
of a particulary fastidious Eton boy. As a matter of fact, in his view,
each of these matters may be equally important; that is why God guides
us in the selection of our haberdashery.
...
Hence, in part, springs Mr. Buchman's extraordinary authority among his
following, an authority not superimposed but gladly accorded.
He is always quietly sure he is right. ... Such certainty is possible
because Mr. Buchman knows his every thought and action to be immediately
determined by the Divine Mind; it is the direct corollary of his belief
in Divine Guidance.Apostle to the Twentieth Century; Frank N. D. Buchman:
Founder of the Oxford Group Movement, Henry P. van Dusen,
Atlantic Monthly magazine, 154:1-16, July 1934, pages 8-9.

For someone to imagine that he can never be wrong is another delusion of grandeur,
and so is the belief that his every thought has been put into his head by God.
It was downright insane for Buchman to imagine that God told him which tie to wear.
(Remember that the other Buchmanites considered themselves lucky
to get one or two "luminous thoughts" during an entire
Quiet Hour, but Frank Buchman claimed
that he was in constant conscious contact with God.)

In addition, someone who is "Never for a fleeting instant or in
any possible circumstances ... unsure in speech or action" is
shallow, thoughtless, and impulsive. A thoughtful wise man pauses to consider his actions
and ask himself whether his course of action is right and wise and the best thing to do.
Someone without any self-doubts whatsoever is a megalomaniac and a narcissist.

And Buchman's followers were guilty of spiritual laziness and spiritual
cowardice — they were attracted to someone who claimed to never be wrong because
they wanted
a guaranteed ticket to Heaven.
They wanted to be freed from all doubts and also spared from the bother of having
to think for themselves. ("Don't think, just do what Frank says.
He's always right.")
But Buchman's followers were overlooking the simple fact that just because
a man is very convincing does not prove that he is right.

A. J. Russell, one of Frank Buchman's fawning followers, even wrote of Buchman:

It is impossible to understand Frank at all unless he is thought of
as always in God's presence, listening for direction and accepting power,
which he says is the normal way for a sane human to live.
Frank is an example of the psychologically mature man, thoroughly
integrated round the highest relationship possible to man.
He does not wander voluntarily in his spiritual life: he goes direct to
the Source all of the time, and expects the Source to come to him.
This discipline at the heart of the movement means complete freedom.
The paradox of Christianity.
Frank is a child listening to God and obeying Him implicitly, and getting
all those around him to do the same. And no one will ever understand this
movement who does not accept this as a working hypothesis, whether he believes
it or not at the start. After a time he begins to see it is true.
A. J. Russell, writing in For Sinners Only, quoted in
Remaking the World, the speeches of Frank Buchman,
Frank N. D. Buchman, page 256.

"The normal way for a sane human to live"?
How can it be 'normal' when it is also so rare?

And such behavior,"He ... expects the Source to come to him...
This discipline... complete freedom. The paradox of Christianity."
was not Christianity — it was gross heresy.
Nobody is entitled to expect God to come to him and give him
infallible advice all day long.
That's just another
demand for a miracle,
and it's also the Pharisical practice of
seeking a sign, both of which Jesus
condemned.

Even a sympathetic, committed, life-long Buchmanite noticed that
Frank Buchman didn't follow his own rules, or practice what he preached:

... it was also clear, at least in accepted theory, that "after faith is
come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." [Galatians 3:24]
Frank himself lived this way. "Freedom of the spirit" was his watchword.
He did not make his own morality a personal concern. The four standards
were not for him a checklist. His measuring rod was rather his own inner
revelation. Since for him there was no human reference point, he was a
law unto himself. The king could do no wrong. His own posture was basically
antinomian.World Changing Through Life Changing: The Story of Frank Buchman and
Moral Re-Armament; A Thesis for the Degree of Master of Sacred Theology
at Andover Newton Theological School,
T. Willard Hunter, 1977, pages 126-127.

antinomian

1. "one who maintains the moral law is not binding on Christians under the law of grace," 1645, from M.L. Antinomi, name given to a sect of this sort that arose in Germany in 1535, from Gk. anti- "opposite, against" + nomos "rule, law"

2. Opposed to or denying the fixed meaning or universal applicability of moral law:"By raising segregation and racial persecution to the ethical level of law, it puts into practice the antinomian rules of Orwell's world. Evil becomes good, inhumanity is interpreted as charity, egoism as compassion" (Elie Wiesel).

So what were the consequences of living such a "Guided" life?

Today he is seldom seen except at the most fashionable hotels and on the most
expensive liners, with apparently limitless financial resources flowing
from mysterious reservoirs.
...[Narcissism — he feels entitled to the best
of everything.]
Not once or twice, but repeatedly, he has broken with colleagues, surrendered
position, income, security, and the certainty of influence, and thrust himself
into solitary isolation because he could not endure the temporizing and
cowardice and selfishness of conventional Christian leadership.[Buchman couldn't stand people who
wouldn't do things his way. Like the psychiatrists said,
"Interpersonal relations are typically impaired due to problems
derived from entitlement, the need for admiration, and the relative
disregard for the sensitivities of others."]
To-day he and his Movement exude a bouyancy, an optimism, a light-hearted
well-being, which many who take the tragedy of their world's life seriously find
almost repulsive. But behind the success of to-day lie periods of desolating
loneliness and blank failure — failure of plans which were felt to be the
dictation of God Himself.Apostle to the Twentieth Century; Frank N. D. Buchman:
Founder of the Oxford Group Movement, Henry P. van Dusen,
Atlantic Monthly magazine, 154:1-16, July 1934, pages 9-10.
[You know, that has to be disturbing to a true believer, to see God turn out
to be wrong like that...]

It is reported that the first serious inner crisis in Mr. Buchman's life
occurred when a fellow seminary student accused him of ambition.
The deliberate selection of a difficult and obscure post for his first
ministry was his response to the charge.
Apparently the suggestion touched a sensitive point of consciousness.
In the years since, Mr. Buchman has often been accused of ambition,
of unfairness, of intolerance, of hypersensitiveness to criticism,
of self-righteousness, of courting opposition.[Narcissistic inability to tolerate criticism.]
Now the line between personal ambition and passionate concern for God's work
may be a very narrow one. It is clear that from very early in his career
Mr. Buchman has felt himself designated for important tasks, and equipped with
gifts adequate to their importance.
Moreover, he has been driven by an overmastering sense of urgency and
a corresponding impatience with cowardly or half-hearted or conventional
measures. He has known God's Will for himself, for the church, and
often for others.[More delusions of grandeur.]
As a result, he has been unable to conceal his contempt for what he believes
to be the incomplete dedication which characterizes most Christians, even
those in responsible leadership.
He has been unable to check a quick disdain for the lumbering and inept
and ineffective efforts of most workers within the church.[Narcissistic "arrogant,
haughty behaviors and attitudes", as well as "the relative
disregard for the sensitivities of others."]
He has been unable to stifle sharp resentment at any who might raise questions
as to the soundness of his own vision or the wisdom and effectiveness
of his methods.[Narcissistic inability to tolerate criticism.]
So certain is he of the indispensable importance of that which he knows
himself called to do — winning individuals one by one to complete surrender
of their lives, and then to the winning of others — that everyone else
must be called to precisely the same task.
In his view of the Christian enterprise, there is no division of responsibility
in this matter; all are required to be 'soul surgeons.'
This is the sine qua non of the Christian life. No one —
statesman, physician, research scientist, bootblack, bishop — is
excused from that primary responsibility.
Nor is this all. No one is recognized as really winning souls effectively
unless he is doing it in precisely the manner developed by Mr. Buchman.[Still some more delusions of grandeur
— "I'm right and everybody else is wrong. Everyone must
follow my lead and do things my way."]
This is one aspect of the picture. There is another. Not only is Mr. Buchman
unsparingly rigorous in his estimate of the effectiveness of others;
he will not abide the slightest questioning of his own work or that of
his colleagues, except from those fully within the Movement.
When queries are raised by outsiders, they are not met with reasoned
rebuttal.
'Win your argument and lose your man' is one of his favorite warnings.
The best defense is a vigorous attack.
The validity of the slightest question is emphatically denied.
Moreover, even if it come from a person of wisdom and experience and,
as far as the questioner can read his own conscience, it be sincere
and sympathetic, it tends to be labeled 'opposition.'
On the other hand, honest opposition is labeled 'persecution.'
Almost always criticism or doubt or even indifference is attributed to
'sin' on the part of the questioner — perhaps the rationalization
of some grave hidden weakness or the sin of jealousy or laziness or cowardice.
[Narcissistic inability to tolerate criticism;
lashing out in defiant counterattack.]
It is easy to understand why Mr. Buchman has always found it exceedingly
difficult to work with others except those who fully share his
convictions and acknowledge his leadership.
There were sharp disagreement and clash in his first position;
he resigned, harboring deep resentment against the committee which had
vetoed his policies.
There were acute difficulties at Hartford Seminary during his tenure
there. At various times he has been intimately associated with
important Christian leaders and movements as a colleague; almost
always the connection has finally been severed when his associates did not
completely accept his views or would not fully accede to his plans
for their work.
It is not clear that these sharp differences always centred on matters
of fundamental principle.
It is significant that Mr. Buchman's career
has left a trail of broken and raw relationships, of men and women
branded as enemies
because they ventured to raise doubt about some
element in his programme or the infallibility of his judgement.Apostle to the Twentieth Century; Frank N. D. Buchman:
Founder of the Oxford Group Movement, Henry P. van Dusen,
Atlantic Monthly magazine, 154:1-16, July 1934, pages 10-11.

[Like the psychiatrist said, "performance may
be disrupted due to intolerance of criticism or defeat."]

And as harsh as all of that sounds, Henry P. van Dusen was actually writing a
balanced, if not sympathetic, analysis of Frank Buchman. Van Dusen also wrote:

I doubt if there is a psychiatrist in the world whose intuitive sensitiveness
to
spiritual disease
can begin to compare with his in acuteness and accuracy.
Years of unbroken concentration upon the inmost problems of personal
life have furnished him with unique powers of instantaneous and
piercing diagnosis.[Did you notice that
"spiritual disease" phrase?
Bill Wilson didn't invent that idea or terminology either.
He obviously got that jargon from Frank Buchman and the Oxford Group, too.]
But to equipment forged by experience is undoubtedly added remarkable
inborn aptitude for character discernment. For Mr. Buchman is not only
a mystic; he is a psychic as well. Not infrequently, after two sentences
of causal conversation with a new acquaintance, he will suggest the presence
of secret difficulties which the other had been hiding from his most
intimate compansions, or even from himself.
When he enters a drawing-room, his rapier insight moves unnoticed from
person to person. Within five minutes he has formed his estimate of
every person in the room, fastening upon the inner keys to behavior
in each person's life -- all the while taking his part fully in the
inconsequential patter.
...
No one who aims to take the measure of the man can afford to overlook this
extraordinary power. Occasionally he badly misses his guess, sometimes
with grossly impertinent accusations and unpardonable injustice to people's
character; but not often.
And, when he feels confident in his diagnosis, he does not hesitate to confront
the person with his failing or need, be he a peasant or prelate, statesman
or archbishop or Pullman porter, chance travelling companion or one of his
closest associates. But, his message does not stop with diagnosis.
In every instance, with equal assurance he prescribes the needed remedy --
however obscure or chronic the spiritual malady, however shackling the
other's defeat, however jaunty his self-confident exterior.Apostle to the Twentieth Century; Frank N. D. Buchman:
Founder of the Oxford Group Movement, Henry P. van Dusen,
Atlantic Monthly magazine, 154:1-16, July 1934, page 8.

So Buchman saw a room full of people
as just so many targets to be attacked and denounced as sinners?
There is a word for such a person -- predator. As the psychiatrists said,
"A narcissist is interpersonally exploitative."

Like the manual on Soul Surgery taught:

Soon you will be hearing which of Christ's four standards of purity, honesty, love, or
unselfishness the other is breaking. Then challenge!One Thing I Know, A. J. (Arthur James) Russell, 1933, page 202.

I've heard preachers say that what was nice about Jesus Christ was that he
looked for, and spoke to, the goodness in people (like how he spoke to the
adulteress whom He saved from being stoned to death).
Obviously, Frank Buchman looked for and spoke to the bad in people.

And one does not have to be "psychic" to do that. A small inventory
of standard denunciations is quite sufficient to humiliate the majority of people because,
for the most part, people are pretty much the same.
For instance, Frank Buchman could, with a high degree of confidence,
accuse most young unmarried people of being too interested in sex —
and that was in fact one of Frank Buchman's favorite accusations.
(As Buchman's slogan said, "Crows are black the world over.")
Peter Howard reported Frank Buchman attacking one young woman:

[Frank Buchman] literally shook with the strength of his feelings.
"I may have the wrong details," he said, "but I have the right girl,
the right diagnosis and the right cure. You are the girl, the diagnosis
is that you are sex mad, the cure is Jesus Christ."The Confusion of Tongues, Charles W. Ferguson. 1940, page 16.

But Frank Buchman's generic accusations did not always work:
"Occasionally he badly misses his guess, sometimes with grossly
impertinent accusations and unpardonable injustice to people's character..."

Van Dusen continued:

The tides of history have swung to Mr. Buchman. And through all
those years he has never for one moment doubted God's appointed task for
him. To which the friend will retort with two questions:
'How came the tides of history to turn in that direction? Why has such
strange, almost fanatic, assurance borne such extraordinary fruit?'Apostle to the Twentieth Century; Frank N. D. Buchman:
Founder of the Oxford Group Movement, Henry P. van Dusen,
Atlantic Monthly magazine, 154:1-16, July 1934, page 9.

Henry van Dusen wrote that in 1934, but eventually,
the "tides of history" turned and went out on
Frank Buchman, and his "extraordinary fruit" rotted and smelled
like the garbage left on a mud flat at low tide...